National where to order viagra organizations, such as the American Lung Association and the ACS, buy robaxin once daily host online support communities, where people can share experiences and buy allopurinol alternatives info find practical help. Richter's syndrome occurs when CLL quickly transforms order ampicillin lowest dosage cheapest price into an aggressive form of lymphoma, which refers to cancer purchase lipitor overnight delivery of the lymphatic system. People can take certain measures to diclofenac online avoid transmitting the infection, such as washing their hands frequently, buy cream on internet especially after touching the infected eye, or using separate towels cheap advair and washcloths. If eczema symptoms are causing significant discomfort even cheap clindamycin in uk with measures to reduce allergen exposure, contact a doctor. In cheap prescription without consultation artane order most cases, families will cover the cost of long-term care approved clozapine pharmacy themselves, although some people may be eligible for long-term care insurance,.

How far is it fair to go to put the spotlight on those opposing you by making public information about them readily accessible? Supporters of gay marriange in California have taken public information — the addresses of those supporters of the gay marriage ban who gave more than $100 — and put it on an easy-to-access map. You can look at the map and see who in your neighborhood gave money to help get the ban passed. Or, who in my neighborhood.

The use of the Internet for public shaming — or is it intimidation? — is not new. The Nuremberg Files was the most troubling example of the genre — listing the addresses of doctors who performed abortions, and graying out their names if they were murdered. The site also listed where their children went to school.

The gay marriage advocates haven’t gone that far, but they have gone far enough to cause some real discomfort. The New York Times reports that to fight back, an attempt will be made to change the law so that the addresses of donors of as little as $100 are no longer public information.

Who has the better of the free speech argument here — those who feel intimidated, and hence feel their speech is being chilled; or those who just want to publish on the Web in a convenient form information that has long been considered public anyway?

This entry was posted on Monday, January 19th, 2009 at 2:43 pm and is filed under Social computing, The explosion, The Internet and the Web. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.